I picked this up yesterday with Rise of the Apes. I can't help but remember Ralph's perfect score for the 1st movie. I guess the sound has dropped slightly going into the 2nd. Still, very excited to view with my 4 year old this evening!

I watched last night, and can confirm that the audio was not as impressive as the first. Less surround activity and bass had less impact across the board. Certainly no moments on par with the woo shi finger hold skadoosh from the first.

Don't get me wrong, I think many of these kid movies (and yes, they ARE kid movies that are just barely pedestrian to decent viewing for adults, in my opinion.

Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion I suppose, but that's kind of a shallow an uninformed viewpoint, in MY opinion. Animated movies are more than just for kids. In fact, there are plenty of "human" movies as you put it that are much dumber and less worth watching than some of the animated masterpieces. You don't need actor's faces to have emotion, have a story, etc. Have you seen Toy Story 3 for example, that won an Oscar? Seen the clever humor and pop-culture references in the SHREK movies that kids will never even get? Seen the origional Kung-Fu Panda?

You might look down on animated movies, but they are sometimes very technically proficient and highly entertaining. The first KFP movie looked absolutely stunning on my LCD/LED display and sounded fantastic as well. In a world where more than half of the traditional films are garbage, I welcome well crafted and polished animated movies.

Oh and, based on this review and my love of the first movie, I gave this a blind buy: I'm sure I won't be dissapointed. And BRAVO to Dreamworks, proving that Pixar doesn't have a monopoly on excellent animation.

I was hoping Po would evolve to more than Jack Black sound effects and blatantly obvious gags. I liked his noodle-cooking..now tofu too...dad, and I was good to see the Furious Five and Po fight together...at times, but I'll pass on the purchase of this one.

Don't get me wrong, I think many of these kid movies (and yes, they ARE kid movies that are just barely pedestrian to decent viewing for adults, in my opinion. But you could argue that's the dilemma with a family movie I suppose )

Let the dog pile begin.

I also question why you feel this way. Out of my top all time favorite films, frankly, the majority of them tend to be family appropriate. I use the term appropriate, because I view it as film that isn't just for families, only that that they can also watch it without excessive questionable material being put on display.

Babe, The Iron Giant, How to Train Your Dragon, Grave of the Fireflies, The Lion King, The Incredibles, etc are all fantastic films that ANYONE should consider required viewing.

Some might label their content pedestrian, but I submit they do as fine a job dealing with adult subjects as love, loss, death, revenge, suspected infidelity, family struggles, etc. as well as any "adult" R rated art house flick. In fact, it's the limitations and instituted restraints put on all family film makers they have to work within that I have immense respect for. With these confines they are still able to convey extremely strong/worthwhile stories and emotions.

I don't want to make it sound like I'm a prude, I'm not. I love me some Dead/Alive (Braindead) as much as the next guy, but it always strikes a nerve when someone belittles an art form and genre with a broad stroke and a somewhat condescending tone.

Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion I suppose, but that's kind of a shallow an uninformed viewpoint, in MY opinion. Animated movies are more than just for kids. In fact, there are plenty of "human" movies as you put it that are much dumber and less worth watching than some of the animated masterpieces. You don't need actor's faces to have emotion, have a story, etc. Have you seen Toy Story 3 for example, that won an Oscar? Seen the clever humor and pop-culture references in the SHREK movies that kids will never even get? Seen the origional Kung-Fu Panda?

You might look down on animated movies, but they are sometimes very technically proficient and highly entertaining. The first KFP movie looked absolutely stunning on my LCD/LED display and sounded fantastic as well. In a world where more than half of the traditional films are garbage, I welcome well crafted and polished animated movies.

Oh and, based on this review and my love of the first movie, I gave this a blind buy: I'm sure I won't be dissapointed. And BRAVO to Dreamworks, proving that Pixar doesn't have a monopoly on excellent animation.

I'm sorry, but since I supplied you with either none of my viewing history or, more importantly, my reasoning as to why I consider them largely marginal "adult" viewing you're characterization of my opinion is of course baseless and in this case, wholly inaccurate.

The reality that there exists thousands of terrible traditional films is of course meaningless to my contention. The point that there's quippy one-liners that only adults will "catch" in these movies is worse, still. Yeah, I note those and appreciate them...that's what brings some of these cartoons into "palatable" adult territory.

The fact is (to me anyway) that these movies are all but unavoidable to people who have kids so Pixar and company have keenly made them serviceable for the adults who accompany them. That doesn't mean that anything beyond a fantastically small percentage of them sit down and choose to watch them by themselves (alone). And there's a good reason for it. They are still made for children.

Now I realize such a statement will draw every adult who does out of the woodwork and into this thread, but that doesn't change the fact that they're in the microscopic minority (adults who watch these movies by themselves).

Further, the material that what will enterain a grown adult and a 6 year old are generally polar opposites and precisely why these movies are usually just passable for one or the other (the precise opposing argument can be made for wholly "adult" cartoons: outside of the pretty colors, children will be largely unentertained by them.

If you take issue with that idea, then your debate is rather of a philoshical nature which is entirely beyond the scope of thie thread.

I also question why you feel this way. Out of my top all time favorite films, frankly, the majority of them tend to be family appropriate. I use the term appropriate, because I view it as film that isn't just for families, only that that they can also watch it without excessive questionable material being put on display.

Babe, The Iron Giant, How to Train Your Dragon, Grave of the Fireflies, The Lion King, The Incredibles, etc are all fantastic films that ANYONE should consider required viewing.

Some might label their content pedestrian, but I submit they do as fine a job dealing with adult subjects as love, loss, death, revenge, suspected infidelity, family struggles, etc. as well as any "adult" R rated art house flick. In fact, it's the limitations and instituted restraints put on all family film makers they have to work within that I have immense respect for. With these confines they are still able to convey extremely strong/worthwhile stories and emotions.

I don't want to make it sound like I'm a prude, I'm not. I love me some Dead/Alive (Braindead) as much as the next guy, but it always strikes a nerve when someone belittles an art form and genre with a broad stroke and a somewhat condescending tone.

Peace!

The films are fine. However, I find 95% of them to be re-treads of nursery rhymes and good cartoons with lessons/entertainment to be learned/enjoyed that I took in 20 years ago. Perfect for children. Perhaps a % of the adult population either missed these altogether or need to be/enjoy being reminded of their youth. I do not know so I cannot speak for them.

I too have my guilty pleasures and neither look to be or expect to be challenged every time I sit down in front of my television.

That said, I don't think it a coincidence that I've never felt compelled to re-watch any of these Pixar/cartoon films. I understand those with children likely have little choice in the matter and will even learn to love them or become wretchedly miserable. The formers prolly a better idea.

In the end neither of us are going to convince the other so it's likely pointless to continue this dialogue.

Stick with the movie guys! Personally I enjoyed this one as much, if not more,than the first! IT was a free trip to the theater for me but I would've got my money's worth either way! Good review, Ralph!

It's a sad fact that many (if not most) of American animated films still cling to the "kiddie-quotient" while their global counterparts have long ago embraced the animated medium as a way to tell very mature and non-child friendly stories; e.g. Isao Takahata's "Grave of the Fireflies", which packs a more devastating punch than most live-action features. It's a fair assessment to say that this is due to American audiences being largely dumbed-down by current popular entertainment, which prevents "serious" animation from gaining a significant foothold. That's not saying that it won't happen at some point, but will rather most likely be slow in coming on these shores.

So yes, American animation is still largely geared toward the G-rated audience demographic. But the more success stories like Toy Story and Kung Fu Panda enter the public consciousness, the more the quality and gravity of said storytelling will improve. And everyone benefits.

The films are fine. However, I find 95% of them to be re-treads of nursery rhymes and good cartoons with lessons/entertainment to be learned/enjoyed that I took in 20 years ago. Perfect for children. Perhaps a % of the adult population either missed these altogether or need to be/enjoy being reminded of their youth. I do not know so I cannot speak for them.

I too have my guilty pleasures and neither look to be or expect to be challenged every time I sit down in front of my television.

That said, I don't think it a coincidence that I've never felt compelled to re-watch any of these Pixar/cartoon films. I understand those with children likely have little choice in the matter and will even learn to love them or become wretchedly miserable. The formers prolly a better idea.

In the end neither of us are going to convince the other so it's likely pointless to continue this dialogue.

Let's just be happy we can choose what we want to enjoy.

James

Your assumptions are offensive, belittling, and immature. Whatever your issues are with childhood and adulthood, they should not be trumpeted as some kind of acid test for those who see it differently than you. It's awkward and embarrassing to see the justifications provided for such judgments. If you didn't not like the movie, that's fine. If you did like, thats fine, too. But to condescend to those who did like it by attempting to psychoanalyze those who hold a different opinion is ludicrous.

Sad to see that Mr. Potts found the surround mix and LFE to be dialed back a bit from the first KFP movie. I thought that was the most pleasant surprise of the first movie- very dynamic and engaging sound effects with a surprising LFE assault at the end. Still, this looks to be a good one to have in the collection.

Just watched this last night and I have to say, this is one of the best examples of animated 3D I've seen yet. The depth was just incredible and the occasional pop-out effects were done well. One of the first times I've ever felt the urge to duck with a 3D movie (didn't actually duck physically, but I felt an instinctive urge to do so ).

Most of the pop-out effects in other movies don't trigger this response for me because I'm aware that it isn't real. Oddly enough, the presentation of this animated adventure drew me in enough to trigger that instinct.

Sad to see that Mr. Potts found the surround mix and LFE to be dialed back a bit from the first KFP movie. I thought that was the most pleasant surprise of the first movie- very dynamic and engaging sound effects with a surprising LFE assault at the end. Still, this looks to be a good one to have in the collection.

I'm bummed a bit about it too. The first one still has my all time favorite demo scene (The escape from prison scene) and it sounds like (hah!) I'll need to curtail my expectations a tad.

I understand those with children likely have little choice in the matter and will even learn to love them or become wretchedly miserable.

Critics who treat 'adult' as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.
― C.S. Lewis

Fine review, but I'm trying to understand how these eye-candy cartoon movies are weighed against typical human films.

I mean I guess, what's the benchmark?

There has to be at least a dozen Pixar/cartoon movies with 97+ video scores, a shockingly large number considering the genre.

What's that tally for traditional films, I wonder?

Don't get me wrong, I think many of these kid movies (and yes, they ARE kid movies that are just barely pedestrian to decent viewing for adults, in my opinion. But you could argue that's the dilemma with a family movie I suppose ) look exceptional, but at the same time I think there are plenty of "real" films that look just as superb- both within their genre, AND when leveled against the toons.

I would imagine since the identical scale is used for either there's not really a distinction between the two, but if that's the case how is say the Dark Knight a 93-95 (don't recall exactly, but I know it's in that range) and this is a "perfect" 100? Cannot either reach the plateau where you can say: this is the best we can do, circa 2011?

Just an honest question. And who knows, perhaps I've missed the 97+ video scores for the trads?

thanks,

James

While I don't agree with your assessment that "...barely pedestrian to decent viewing..."

I do agree with the grading and have thought the same myself. A vast majority of the 100's are animation. While I don't expect Ralph to do this because I just appreciate the reviews for what they are... They still give you a good indication. I suppose it would make more sense to rate animation differently from "real" films. Obviously a "real" film cannot reach the same level of detail as an animation that has been combed through digitally. So a 100 "real" film and a "100" animation, I'd think the 100 animation would have better picture. Could be wrong. Really 100 should be the best film to date...so if anything that comes out bests the 100 film of yesterday, the old 100 score films would be 99 and the new film would be 100. But that's a lot of work, and frankly, who gives a poop. If it's 97,98,99 or 100 you know it's going to be a good looking film whether it's animation or "real".

Ralph you are my go to for when I want to watch a Blu-Ray simply for audio or video quality so I appreciate that greatly. Even if you never respond to my requests for feedback on how you like your Canton speakers(fellow Canton owner, rare in the US).

Ralph you are my go to for when I want to watch a Blu-Ray simply for audio or video quality so I appreciate that greatly. Even if you never respond to my requests for feedback on how you like your Canton speakers(fellow Canton owner, rare in the US).

Watched the 3D disc today. I just checked a few scenes against the 2D disc, but as expected the detail and color are hugely better on the 2D version.

The most remarkable thing is the general lack of LFE in this movie. Both compared to the 1st movie and considering the number of big explosions, it's really just absent. Otherwise, the 7.1 DTHD audio is quite good.

I felt the same about the AQ, which may be a deciding factor in why I felt part one was a lot better.

I felt the same about the AQ, which may be a deciding factor in why I felt part one was a lot better.

But really what did we expect? Of all the prequels and sequels ever made...how many can you name that are better than the original? I'll be judging for myself this week and just hope it's not terrible. The first one is my favorite animation movie, so I know it can't meet or exceed it.

Thank you very much Ralph for posting this informative review! KFP was one of my favorite movies and I love to watch it with my boys and KFP2 was always on the plans to buy, but after your review, I'm just more excited to watch it.

But really what did we expect? Of all the prequels and sequels ever made...how many can you name that are better than the original? I'll be judging for myself this week and just hope it's not terrible. The first one is my favorite animation movie, so I know it can't meet or exceed it.

I felt the same about the AQ, which may be a deciding factor in why I felt part one was a lot better.

I thought the LFE was decent though I can't compare to the first movie as I didn't have a sub when I saw it. I thought the cannon fire sounded good in the climax scene. The deepest LFE may have been in the scene where Po gets smacked with the hammer early in the movie.

One of the first times I've ever felt the urge to duck with a 3D movie (didn't actually duck physically, but I felt an instinctive urge to do so ).

Most of the pop-out effects in other movies don't trigger this response for me because I'm aware that it isn't real. Oddly enough, the presentation of this animated adventure drew me in enough to trigger that instinct.

I had the same experience and came on here to mention it as well. It was one of the axes thrown by the wolves near the beginning of the film, no?... or was it the first peacock fight? Having trouble recalling. Regardless, it was an ax thrown at the screen. My ninja reflexes kicked in and I almost lunged out of the way... then I had a good chuckle at myself. That was a first for me .. the ducking, not the laughing at myself--that happens all the time

Regarding the whole "animated films get rated higher" debate--animated films have several indispensable advantages over live action. One is the simple fact that there's a lot less likely to go wrong in getting a digitally animated film from the computer to the disc then there is with getting a movie shot on film to the camera--there's a lot that can go wrong there. Another thing though is color. With live-action, our eyes are very sensitive to any sort of color issues, most notably flesh tones. If the color of a person's skin is off even the slightest bit, our eyes pick it up in an instant. Animated films, on the other hand, while already having the advantage of coming straight from the computer or hand-drawn cell, have a little bit of leeway--we're viewing characters that aren't supposed to look real in the first place. I.e. who's to say what their "color" is supposed to be anyways? The same goes for everything else in the film. Grass doesn't have to be the perfect green that it is in real life, because it's NOT real life.

Also wanted to chime in on the audio. Having just watched KFP1 the other day (as I just got it on 3d as well), the audio of KFP2 is pretty disappointing... at least in the bass department. The bass in KFP1 is grade A, reference-level INTENSE!! (It's been a while since I've watched it so either I had forgotten just how extreme the bass was or the 3d version got a boost. I mean, I know it was always good, but the Wushu finger-hold about tore my room down... with AWESOMENESS!) While the first film has several great bass demo scenes, the second has none.

... now that I think of it, it seems like there have been several sequels this year where the bass took a downgrade. Most notably Transformers 3. I hope this isn't some sort of trend.

Critics who treat 'adult' as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.
- C.S. Lewis

Ummm sure. Your first mistake is inferring that I'm using the term "adult" as a quasi stamp of approval. I did nothing of the sort and merely used it as a guide-post to the fact that it's terribly difficult to provide A level entertainment to a 5 year ol an 35 year old...simultaneously. Feel free to disagree with me.

Further, having read the chronicles of narnia (that's all 7) cover to cover thrice as well as the lions share of the balance of his work I'm very familiar with the man.

So then, it's a shame you chose words of his that have little to do with my contention regarding movies primarily geared towards 3-8 yr-olds usually not being wholly satisfying cinematic experiences for people 3 decades older.

But heh, whatever helps you sleep at night.

I'm quite satisfied with my opinion and thoughts so it's a bit bizarre that a couple cannot (seemingly) be amused with their own.

Your assumptions are offensive, belittling, and immature. Whatever your issues are with childhood and adulthood, they should not be trumpeted as some kind of acid test for those who see it differently than you. It's awkward and embarrassing to see the justifications provided for such judgments. If you didn't not like the movie, that's fine. If you did like, thats fine, too. But to condescend to those who did like it by attempting to psychoanalyze those who hold a different opinion is ludicrous.

The fact that you graded my post as "awkward", "embarrassing" and
"ludicrous" within that over-the-top jibbering screed speaks volumes.

Ummm sure. Your first mistake is inferring that I'm using the term "adult" as a quasi stamp of approval. I did nothing of the sort and merely used it as a guide-post to the fact that it's terribly difficult to provide A level entertainment to a 5 year ol an 35 year old...simultaneously. Feel free to disagree with me.

Further, having read the chronicles of narnia (that's all 7) cover to cover thrice as well as the lions share of the balance of his work I'm very familiar with the man.

So then, it's a shame you chose words of his that have little to do with my contention regarding movies primarily geared towards 3-8 yr-olds usually not being wholly satisfying cinematic experiences for people 3 decades older.

But heh, whatever helps you sleep at night.

I'm quite satisfied with my opinion and thoughts so it's a bit bizarre that a couple cannot (seemingly) be amused with their own.

James

I used the quote as thus far in this thread you seemed rather strident in the idea that a children's film can't properly entertain and / or stimulate the mind an adult. Sure a lot of them can't but many of them can and do. The quote is absolutely appropriate as a defense who claim otherwise. Don't get tied up in semantics of the singular word "Adult" as that is not the point.